Issue144 同一主题第一期_By undoerlc

undoerlcUID：194641

Issue144=="It is the artist, not the critic*, who gives society something of lasting value."      (*a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings, etc.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
545words; no time limit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
思路:
完全支持:
(1)艺术的价值最终通过艺术作品来表现而非通过评论来表现
(2)艺术带给我们永恒的东西, 而评价不可以
(3)评价有时会阻碍真的艺术发展
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author asserts that it is the artist, not the critic, functions lasting value on society. I wholeheartedly agree with the author for three reasons: (1) The value of art are eventually achieved by works of art, rather than by the critic; (2) Art present us with insight into what is eternal and universal, but critic cannot; (3) Sometimes, critic hinder the development of true art.

First of all, we and our society benefit from the works of art, rather than art critic. Watching football match could never be replaced by listening to the comments because we all have the different preference and distinct opinions and feelings. Moreover, looking through the past, it is football match itself, not the comments, gradually established the modern football. In the realm of art it is especially the case. We benefit from the music by appreciating the feeling of the artist at that time, not by reading the introduction of the music; We realize the meaning of live by continuous impact from the plot of the film, not from the film critic; We experience the all-consuming feeling about the Sistine Chapel in different perspective  when we see it on the spot. These illustration all persuade us that we understand the true value of art when we encounter art, when our spirit and soul are strongly impacted by the living art. We can live without the art critic, but cannot live without the art and artist.

Moreover, art furnish us opportunities to see through what is eternal and universal, but critic cannot. True art reveals or conceals certain meanings about humanity which prevails eternally. By contrast, art critic, based on the level of civilization and the status of the society, is subject to change in the future. Beethoven's symphony is criticized as harsh noise by critic at his time, but achieve its value as time goes by. Van Gogh’s paintings transcend his time and civilization, sold only one during his lifetime, however, is considered as of profound art value today. Moreover, common sense even tell that artwork may acquire different comments in different countries, but we can share nearly the same art value as it originally made. These examples all tell us that art furnishes our society much more lasting value than critic does by its eternal and universal value.

Thirdly, in some circumstances, critic hamper the true art development rather than help it. The function of art today should be more on disturbance rather than pure pleasure. Therefore, the artist should not be interfered by the critic to express their true passion and expression. However, more and more artist are disturbed by critic today than ever. Critic are in all likelihood tend to force art to conform with the criteria set by them and therefore, hamper the development of true art.

In sum, art furnishes our society something of lasting value by offering us each one some time to walk through the time, to experience the past and the future, to appreciate goodness and evil, to share pleasure and sorrow, so we all have different feeling about the journey. What critic really want to give us is what they think the most common way, however, we can just listen to the advice, but it cannot substitute the journey in any time.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
欢迎互拍, 请留下回拍连接~THX

winnie_nnUID：2208004

Issue144=="It is the artist, not the critic*, who gives society something of lasting value."      (*a person who evaluates works of art, such as novels, films, music, paintings, etc.)
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
545words; no time limit
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
思路:
完全支持:
(1)艺术的价值最终通过艺术作品来表现而非通过评论来表现
(2)艺术带给我们永恒的东西, 而评价不可以
(3)评价有时会阻碍真的艺术发展
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The author asserts that it is the artist, not the critic, functions lasting value on society. I wholeheartedly agree with the author for three reasons: (1) The value of art are eventually achieved by works of art, rather than by the critic (前面用了works of art，后面用critic就不公整了，建议改criticism); (2) Artists present us with insight into what is eternal and universal, but critics cannot; (3) Sometimes, critic hinder the development of true art.(跟我一样，用了正统的开头，不过大家都说自己整一个更好，我现在在改 )

First of all, we and our society benefit from the works of art, rather than art critic. Watching football match could never be replaced by listening to the comments because we all have the different preference and distinct opinions and feelings. Moreover, looking through the past, it is football match itself, not the comments, gradually established the modern football. In the realm of art it is especially the case. We benefit from the (去掉the) music by appreciating (感激的意思，tasting??) the feeling of the artist at that time, not by reading the introduction of the music; We (we) realize the meaning of live by continuous impact from the plot of the (去掉the) film, not from the film critic; We (we) experience the all-consuming feeling about the Sistine Chapel in different perspective when we see it on the spot. These illustrations all persuade us that we understand the true value of art when we encounter art, when our spirit and soul are strongly impacted by the living art. We can live without the art critics, but cannot live without the (去掉the) art and artists.

Moreover, art furnish us opportunities to see through what is eternal and universal, but critic cannot. True art reveals or conceals certain meanings about humanity which prevails eternally. By contrast, art critic (如果不用复数，就加个a，不能什么都没有啊，前面见到一个，我改复数了，好几处这样的，不全改了), based on the level of civilization and the status of the society, is subject to change in the future. Beethoven's symphony is (was) criticized as harsh noise by critics at his time, but it has achieved its value as time goes by. Van Gogh’s paintings transcend his time and civilization, sold only one during his lifetime, however, is (are) considered as of profound art value today. Moreover, common sense even tells that artwork may acquire different comments in different countries, but we can share nearly the same art value as it originally made. These examples all tell us that art furnishes our society much more lasting value than critic does by its eternal and universal value.

Thirdly, in some circumstances, critics hamper the true art development rather than help it. The function of art today should be more on disturbance (不明白啊，艺术怎么又扰乱社会了？不是支持的观点么) rather than pure pleasure. Therefore, the artist should not be interfered (不及物动词没被动语态) by the critic to express their true passion and expression. However, more and more artists are disturbed by critic today than ever. Critics are in all likelihood tending to force art to conform with (to) the criteria set by them and therefore, hamper the development of true art. (没有什么例子啊，缺乏说服力)
In sum, art furnishes our society something of lasting value by offering us each one some time to walk through the time, to experience the past and the future, to appreciate goodness and evil, to share pleasure and sorrow, so we all have different feeling about the journey. What critics really want to give us is what they think the most common way, however, we can just listen to the advice, but it cannot substitute the journey in any time.

很少见到这个题目写完全支持的，呵呵。
语法错误要注意啊，单复数、冠词，都要小心点。
至于观点上，我感觉第一个和第二个比较相近，不如写个不支持的观点？
第三个论证不是很充分，不如前两个好，有类比有例子的。

个人意见，希望对你有帮助：）